If they really want to learn there are enough evidence. The problem is that they don't want to due to ideological reasons or political reasons or philosophical sunk cost or just peer pressure and following the crowd. You can't wake of those who pretend to sleep.
if the whole world thought they'd rather stick with Netflix than fight a bloody war, at that point we will have created world peace. It's as simple as that. One could join a military and go on international adventures whether it is Vietnam or Middle East and return with a one less limb and a lot of PTSD while some coward sit infront of a TV with a controller playing Super Mario. But if there were more people playing Super Mario, we can resurrect, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and a few more and elect them as the leaders of global super powers and we still wouldn't have genocides or holocausts or mass murder and rape with destruction of property.
https://steemit.com/ecotrain/@vimukthi/imagine-there-was-a-war-and-everybody-would-rather-watch-netflix?sort=author_reputation
Trade itself is the opposite of war. You can either gain things through coercion/plunder or you can trade voluntarily. There is no third way. Henry Hazlitt wrote well about this here.
Sad, but yeah...
Iirc it is the Milgram experiments that leave me hesitant to fully accept your literal hypothesis (with games and movies,) however there is a general truth (I feel) to the idea that trade is the opposite to war. Simply, as with trade, both parties/sides/nations get what benefits them without need for aggression, aka peace.
I don't know who said it, (there is debate) but;
I've seen this quote a lot on mises.org As for who said it, this is what I could find: https://fee.org/resources/if-goods-dont-cross-borders/
Thanks, yeah... Some pages say Bastiat...